Leidos awarded $18.8M for DoD test equipment, with contract running through 2029
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $18,800,802 ($18.8M)
Contractor: Leidos, Inc.
Awarding Agency: Department of Defense
Start Date: 2025-01-01
End Date: 2029-12-31
Contract Duration: 1,825 days
Daily Burn Rate: $10.3K/day
Competition Type: NOT COMPETED
Number of Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE
Sector: Defense
Official Description: GENERAL ELECTRONIC TEST STATION (GETS-1000) TEST EQUIPMENT AND TEST PROGRAM SET (TPS) HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE, TEST EQUIPMENT UPGRADES, AND REPAIR PARTS.
Place of Performance
Location: RESTON, FAIRFAX County, VIRGINIA, 20190
State: Virginia Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Defense obligated $18.8 million to LEIDOS, INC. for work described as: GENERAL ELECTRONIC TEST STATION (GETS-1000) TEST EQUIPMENT AND TEST PROGRAM SET (TPS) HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE, TEST EQUIPMENT UPGRADES, AND REPAIR PARTS. Key points: 1. Contract focuses on essential test equipment and software for defense readiness. 2. Sole-source award raises questions about potential cost efficiencies and market alternatives. 3. Long contract duration suggests a sustained need for these specialized services. 4. Performance context is critical given the role of test equipment in military system reliability. 5. Sector positioning within engineering services highlights a niche but vital defense support function.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
Benchmarking the value of this sole-source contract is challenging without competitive data. The $18.8 million total value over five years suggests a significant investment in specialized test equipment. Without comparable contracts or market analysis, it's difficult to definitively assess if the pricing represents good value for money. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type introduces some risk of cost overruns, though the fixed fee component provides a ceiling.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: sole-source
This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning only one vendor, Leidos, Inc., was considered. This approach bypasses the typical competitive bidding process, which usually leads to better price discovery and potentially lower costs for the government. The lack of competition here means the government did not explore alternative solutions or pricing from other qualified contractors.
Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards can result in higher costs for taxpayers as the government may not achieve the most favorable pricing achievable through open competition.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiaries are the Department of the Army and potentially other Department of Defense branches relying on the GENERAL ELECTRONIC TEST STATION (GETS-1000) for system testing. Services delivered include the provision of test equipment, software, upgrades, and repair parts essential for maintaining military readiness. Geographic impact is likely concentrated around Army testing and maintenance facilities, primarily in Virginia where the contractor is located. Workforce implications may involve specialized technicians and engineers required for operating and maintaining the test equipment.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Sole-source award limits price competition, potentially leading to higher costs.
- Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type can incentivize higher spending if not closely managed.
- Long-term duration (5 years) may reduce flexibility to adapt to evolving technology or market prices.
Positive Signals
- Leidos, Inc. is an established contractor with a significant presence in defense services.
- The contract addresses a critical need for specialized test equipment, crucial for military system integrity.
- The fixed fee component of the CPFF contract provides some cost control.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector, specifically supporting defense readiness through specialized test equipment. The market for such niche defense support services is often characterized by a limited number of highly specialized contractors. Comparable spending benchmarks are difficult to establish due to the unique nature of the GETS-1000 system and its associated test program sets. The overall defense engineering services market is substantial, but this contract represents a specific, high-value segment.
Small Business Impact
This contract does not appear to have a small business set-aside component, as indicated by 'sb: false'. Leidos, Inc. is a large business. There is no explicit information provided regarding subcontracting plans for small businesses. The absence of a set-aside suggests that opportunities for small businesses may be limited unless they are direct subcontractors to Leidos, which is not detailed here.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Department of the Army's contracting and program management offices. Accountability measures are inherent in the CPFF contract structure, requiring adherence to defined scope and cost ceilings. Transparency may be limited due to the sole-source nature of the award. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse is suspected.
Related Government Programs
- Defense Test and Evaluation Equipment
- Military Readiness Support Services
- Engineering and Technical Services
- Department of Defense Logistics and Maintenance
Risk Flags
- Sole-source award
- Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type
- Long contract duration
Tags
defense, department-of-defense, department-of-the-army, engineering-services, test-equipment, sole-source, cost-plus-fixed-fee, definitive-contract, leidos-inc, virginia, long-term-contract
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Defense awarded $18.8 million to LEIDOS, INC.. GENERAL ELECTRONIC TEST STATION (GETS-1000) TEST EQUIPMENT AND TEST PROGRAM SET (TPS) HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE, TEST EQUIPMENT UPGRADES, AND REPAIR PARTS.
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is LEIDOS, INC..
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Army).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $18.8 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2025-01-01. End: 2029-12-31.
What is the track record of Leidos, Inc. in providing similar test equipment and services to the Department of Defense?
Leidos, Inc. has a substantial track record in providing a wide range of services to the Department of Defense, including IT, systems engineering, and logistics support. While specific details on their history with the GENERAL ELECTRONIC TEST STATION (GETS-1000) are not provided in this data, their extensive experience in defense contracting suggests a capability to manage complex hardware, software, and support requirements. Their past performance on similar large-scale defense contracts would be a key factor in the government's decision to award this sole-source contract, assuming a justification based on unique capabilities or existing infrastructure.
How does the $18.8 million contract value compare to historical spending on the GETS-1000 system?
The provided data indicates a total contract value of $18.8 million over a five-year period (2025-2029). Without historical spending data specifically for the GETS-1000 system or its predecessors, a direct comparison is not possible. However, this figure represents a significant investment in maintaining and upgrading critical test equipment. To assess value, one would need to analyze past expenditures on similar systems, the rate of technological obsolescence in test equipment, and the cost of developing new capabilities versus upgrading existing ones. The current award suggests a sustained need and potentially a stable, albeit high, cost for this specialized equipment.
What are the primary risks associated with a sole-source award for essential defense test equipment?
The primary risks associated with a sole-source award for essential defense test equipment include a lack of competitive pricing, potentially leading to higher costs for the government and taxpayers. Without competition, there is less incentive for the contractor to innovate or offer the most cost-effective solutions. Furthermore, reliance on a single vendor can create supply chain vulnerabilities and reduce flexibility if the contractor's performance declines or if alternative technologies emerge. The government also loses the opportunity to explore a broader range of technical solutions and potentially discover more efficient or advanced equipment from other market players.
How effective is the Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type in managing costs for specialized defense equipment?
The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type aims to balance cost control with the need for flexibility in complex projects where final costs are uncertain. The 'cost plus' element allows the contractor to recover allowable costs incurred, while the 'fixed fee' provides a predetermined profit margin. This structure can be effective when the scope of work is not fully defined at the outset or involves significant research and development. However, it carries a risk that the contractor may not be sufficiently incentivized to control costs, as their profit is fixed regardless of the final cost. Robust government oversight and clear definition of allowable costs are crucial to mitigate this risk and ensure value for money.
What are the implications of the 5-year contract duration for technological relevance and future spending?
A five-year contract duration for specialized test equipment like the GENERAL ELECTRONIC TEST STATION (GETS-1000) presents both benefits and potential drawbacks regarding technological relevance and future spending. On the positive side, it provides stability and ensures continuous support for critical defense systems over a significant period. This long-term commitment can facilitate deeper integration and optimization of the equipment. However, the rapid pace of technological advancement, particularly in electronics and testing, means that equipment and software could become outdated within this timeframe. This could lead to a need for costly upgrades or replacements sooner than anticipated, or conversely, lock the DoD into using potentially less effective technology for an extended period, impacting future spending decisions.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services › Engineering Services
Product/Service Code: MAINT, REPAIR, REBUILD EQUIPMENT › MAINT, REPAIR, REBUILD OF EQUIPMENT
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED
Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE
Solicitation ID: W31P4Q24R0019
Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Parent Company: Leidos Holdings, Inc.
Address: 1750 PRESIDENTS ST FL 10, RESTON, VA, 20190
Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $48,755,451
Exercised Options: $23,875,164
Current Obligation: $18,800,802
Subaward Activity
Number of Subawards: 3
Total Subaward Amount: $314,677
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: YES
Timeline
Start Date: 2025-01-01
Current End Date: 2029-12-31
Potential End Date: 2029-12-31 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2025-12-30
More Contracts from Leidos, Inc.
- Science Operation and Maintenance Support for the United States Antarctic Program — $3.1B (National Science Foundation)
- Provide Funding for Clin 302 for Pre-Flight and In-Flight Services. Contract Number Dtfawa-05-C-00031, Lockheed Martin. POP 01/16/08-03/31/08 — $1.9B (Department of Transportation)
- THE Facilities Development and Operations Contract(fdoc) Specifies Technical, Managerial, and Adminstrative Work Needed to Ensure the Availablitity, Integrity, and Reliability of Missionoperations Facilites Supporting National Aeronautics and Space Administration (nasa) Human Space Flight (HSF) Programs Requiring Mission Operations Support. the Objective of This Contract IS to Consolidate Efforts Across the Facilities Covered Under Fodoc in Order to Maximize Synergy for Hardware and Software Development, Modification, Sustaining. Maintenance, Reconfiguration, and Operations for the Purpose of Reducing Cost Without Compromising Facility Functionality and Performance. Nasa Will Collaborate With the Contractor on Developing Procedural and Technical Innovations That Improve Quality, Ensure Customer Satisfaction and Reduce Cost. Mission Operations Facilities Currently Support the Space Shuttle Programand the International Space Station Progra, Including International Partner and Commmercial Visiting Vehicles. Mission Operations Facilities Supporting the Cnstellation Program(cxp) ARE Continuously Under Development in Concert With CXP Formulation and Implementation. Fdoc Applies to the Facilities of These Three Programs, and ANY Other HSF Program Requiring Mission Operations Facility Support. in Addition, Future Mission Operations Facilities and Capabilities ARE Within the Technical Scope of This SOW, and Fdoc Worlk Associated With These Facilities Will BE Enabled Through Idiq — $1.3B (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- National Airspace System (NAS) Implementation Support Contract (nisc). Provides Engineering and Technical Support Services to FAA Organizations Responsible for NAS Transformation, Integration and Implementation in the Areas of Implementation and Integration Planning, Transition Planning, Engineering Support, Environmental Support, Automation Support and Other Engineering and Technical Disciplines AS Required. TAS::69 8107::TAS — $1.1B (Department of Transportation)
- Itssc Task Order for Systems — $1.1B (Social Security Administration)
Other Department of Defense Contracts
- Federal Contract — $51.3B (Humana Government Business Inc)
- Lrip LOT 12 Advance Acquisition Contract — $35.1B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- SSN 802 and 803 Long Lead Time Material — $34.7B (Electric Boat Corporation)
- 200204!008532!1700!AF600 !naval AIR Systems Command !N0001902C3002 !A!N! !N! !20011026!20120430!008016958!008016958!834951691!n!lockheed Martin Corporation !lockheed Blvd !fort Worth !tx!76108!27000!439!48!fort Worth !tarrant !texas !+000026000000!n!n!018981928201!ac15!rdte/Aircraft-Eng/Manuf Develop !a1a!airframes and Spares !2ama!jast/Jsf !336411!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !a!n!r!2!002!n!1a!a!n!z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!c!n! ! ! !Y! !N00019!0001! — $34.2B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- KC-X Modernization Program — $32.0B (THE Boeing Company)